Compare
Up to six funds side by side, and how much of each is the same portfolio as the others. Overlap is Σ min(weight) over the stocks both hold, from the latest disclosures. All 6,937 schemes are searchable — by scheme name, by fund house, or by the category you know them as.
4 of 6 chosen
Add another Value fund — overlap says most about funds of one kind:
Overlap
share of the portfolio the two funds hold in common
| each fundagainst each other | UTI Value | Bandhan Value | HSBC Value | Nippon India Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTI ValueValue | itself | UTI Value and Bandhan Value share 40% of their portfolios | UTI Value and HSBC Value share 30% of their portfolios | UTI Value and Nippon India Value share 40% of their portfolios |
| Bandhan ValueValue | Bandhan Value and UTI Value share 40% of their portfolios | itself | Bandhan Value and HSBC Value share 29% of their portfolios | Bandhan Value and Nippon India Value share 37% of their portfolios |
| HSBC ValueValue | HSBC Value and UTI Value share 30% of their portfolios | HSBC Value and Bandhan Value share 29% of their portfolios | itself | HSBC Value and Nippon India Value share 28% of their portfolios |
| Nippon India ValueValue | Nippon India Value and UTI Value share 40% of their portfolios | Nippon India Value and Bandhan Value share 37% of their portfolios | Nippon India Value and HSBC Value share 28% of their portfolios | itself |
Closest pair: UTI Value Fund and Bandhan Value Fund share 40% of their portfolios. Most of what each of them holds, the other does not; whether two funds this far apart belong in one portfolio is a separate question.
Read a cell as: of everything the two funds hold, this much is the same holding at the same weight. It is symmetric — the pair above the diagonal and the pair below it are one number shown twice. A pair at 0% holds nothing in common, which is a real answer, and often the useful one.
Side by side
record, cost, returns, drawdown, size
| Measure | UTI Value | Bandhan Value | HSBC Value | Nippon India Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Value | Value | Value | Value |
| Fund house | UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. | Bandhan AMC Limited | HSBC Asset Management (India) Private Ltd. | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 37% of 109 | 67% of 109 | 100% of 11 | 93% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 0.79% points | 1.17% points | 1.12% points | 0.82% points |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 47% | 68% | 75% | 82% |
| Run by P7 | Amit Premchandani · 8.6 yrs | Daylynn Pinto · ≥ 3.5 yrs | Venugopal Manghat · 14 yrs | Meenakshi Dawar · 8.3 yrs |
| 1-year return | −4.1% | −1.1% | 2.4% | −2.8% |
| 3 years p.a. | 12.1% | 10.4% | 15.9% | 14.0% |
| 5 years p.a. | 11.0% | 12.8% | — | 13.4% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −17.2% | −17.9% | −19.6% | −17.6% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹9,603 Cr | ₹10,051 Cr | ₹15,373 Cr | ₹8,875 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 12 yrs | 4.9 yrs | 3.8 yrs | 12 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 71 · 41% | 68 · 47% | 86 · 32% | 94 · 36% |
Funds in different categories are not comparable on returns — a category error is the first thing the postulates refuse to make. Compare each to its own category on its fund page.